When Steve Jobs unveiled the Apple iAd platform back some months ago, many were amazed at the continuing wave of Apple’s innovation and monetization model he has built. As gaggles stood in awe of “the Steve” (as they usually do), others simply shrugged it off as less than earth shattering. It was amongst those unimpressed that the question was asked “how this is any different than banners ad with compelling landing pages behind them?”
While there is certainly more to the iAd platfrom than meets the naked eye, what it really hammers home, once again, is how the bar has been raised for marketers to rethink content.
As the old refrain goes, the top three most important things in real estate are location, location location. For marketers, it is time again to face the content, content, content conundrum. No, not the kind of singular message tagline type content that tucks nicely into a predefined ad space. Rather, it is about getting people to want to spend time with what lies in wait behind the little banner ad. It is about transcending the consumer mindset and lacklustre expectations that have been set up by less than stellar flat landing pages. It is now about understanding and delivering a payoff for consumers (and not solely the advertiser) when clicking through those little banners.
Now, we all know the mechanics of iAd will work, that is not the issue. The challenge for marketers is to think through the type of robust, entertaining, educational and utility driven content that will make ads become less like, well, ads. Achieving, as Jobs illustrates, emotion and interactivity all at once. That is the real nut to crack.
Take a look at Steve Jobs presenting the iAd platform back in May and ask yourself what you’d do with the potential of a universe inside an ad.

Fresh off his interview with Lesley Stahl on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Mark Zuckerberg is being asked to remove the very popular “Scrabulous” app from Facebook. An article from the wires this morning cites copyright claims by two of the worlds largest toy companies.
I don’t think it is coincidence given that the 60 Minutes piece that aired recently showed the Scrabulous application. Perhaps I am wrong on this, but is seems rather suspect.
Aside from getting into a discussion over copyright, I wonder if the folks at Hasbro and Mattel could have approached this in a different manner? The application is quite popular on Facebook. Is this not likely to do more damage to the brand than good if they get their way and it is removed? Perhaps this is a move to supply Facebook with a “legit” version of the game. Or, perhaps it was the only thing the toy execs could do having been caught off-guard to the opportunity unfolding in the digital world to extend the brand. Instead of unleashing a killer app, they are opting to become an application killer.
Two things are clear to me. First, when it comes to bringing a game to life online, it seems like a lay-up in terms of moving off the shelf from Toys “R” Us and breathing new life via the digital world. The transition of content offered up as widgets, Facebook applications or whatever are sitting right in front of people’s noses. Webkinz and Club Penguin have been effective in mixing up the online and offline worlds, so is it really a stretch for established offline games to rethink the model?
Second, I am not a big Scrabble fan, but “Scrabble” has been talked about a lot lately. This is undoubtedly due to the popularity of the application on Facebook. Before this legal wrangle, I had no clue this was not the “offical” version of the game and I’ll bet you didn’t know either. So, the Scrabble brand has benefited. If I am Hasbro and Mattel, I’d like to find out who programmed the application and put them on staff.
Perhaps Zuckerberg and Co. should try out an angle with select brands (or their agencies) where brand managers and application developers team up to build branded content/games like “Scrabulous” that people will use and love – where the advertising is in the game itself.
It is less likely to create the furor seen with Beacon and Social Ads. I mean, if a fast-food giant like Burger King can do advergaming, why can’t the game people?
UPDATE: My friend Shel Holtz of For Immediate Release fame and the blog A Shel of My Former Self has a great post explaining the rationale behind the lawsuit. He worked for Mattel, worth a read.

I am all messed up today and it’s not only about the new iPhone. I thought I had posted this story “Apple unveils the new Apple iPhone” over here on The Client Side. It would appear that I was not paying attention to the account to which I was posting and it was posted over at the CMA – Canadian Marketing Blog. Well, at least I can say I have a contribution for CMA blog for 2007 already!
Anyhow, here is the news from the stage at the MacWorld Conference straight-up from Steve Jobs himself. The story Engadget – The Apple iPhone. Hat tip to Mitch Joel for letting me know about the breaking news.